Debunk Pseudo Science Claims

 Why people believe in "flat Earth"? Did they know that it is a pseudo science claim? Hmm... something just popped up in my mind while I am listening to my " absolutely better reconstructed " Hi-Res music and thinking about this discussion in head-fi . Why people believe in "flat Earth"? Did someone (supposed-to-be an "expert") show some "scientific evidence" to those believers with some real-life experiments / demos to prove that the Earth is flat? Did those believers experience similar "scientific evidence" in their daily life and these experiences confirm the "scientific evidence" the "expert" shown to them? Would these "confirmation of the scientific evidence shown by the expert" cause these believers to truely believe in "flat Earth" and become a hardcore flat Earth believer because they do really experience the "evidence" themselves? When other shows these "flat Eart

Confused with Part 1  of the discussion? Let me explain further... (source: " the Monty's video ", a "perfect" sine wave output) (By the way, thanks to the discussion on head-fi , I noticed the Monty's video was removed  from the official website .   if you click on the "Digital Show & Tell" link on the web site, you'll get the following: Hmm... why it was removed from the official site? Did someone find out it is mis-leading?  The YouTube copy of the same video was uploaded to the FLStudio channel by someone else. Probably they need to ask someone to remove it and they forgot. update: one fellow member in head-fi found out the video is somehow still available in the  offical site domain  However, it is not accessible from the of the main article ) As I expected, I got quite a lot of "strong" feedbacks from other people in various on-line discussions. Most of these are in the form of bullying-like argument except the one I found o

 Pseudo Science factory?  Just saw an interesting dialog in ASR forum. What do you think about the following dialog with your critical thinking skill?  (source:  Is 96khz LDAC Bluetooth useless? Should LDAC be capped at 44/48khz to limit compression loss? | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum  ) Simple Question:     Is the answer provided correct? Anawer A: Yes, the answer is correct Answer B: No, the answer is not correct Anawer C: None of the above

Magic! Now you don't see it !   Background for our discussion: 1. As stated in " why I start my blog ",  I created my account (@sunjam) in Audio Science Forum (ASR ) for my journey in the Audio Science World on 19 March 2024. 2. I saw a lot of fun and inspiring topics in ASR 3. Meanwhile, I noticed the wrong belief (i.e. the claim) that " Hi-Res is useless " ( statement 1 ) were being promoted by a lot of ASR members (including "Major Contributors", "Donors", "Sponsor", "Industrial Insider") to the people who question the claim 4. Most of these supporters claim "statement 1" is " factual ". They emphasized that there are a lot of objective tests / measurements supporting such claim. For example, this is the  paper  (from Journal of the Audio Engineering Socieity) they used for the claim. (This blog explain why the paper does not support statement 1) 5. Some of these supporters even state th

 Taboo and pseudo science (This blog is related to my previous blog regarding debunking misleading video ) The more  I discuss with other people on-line , the more I feel the relationship between Taboo and Pseudo Science and the strength of  their bullying  on critical thinking. If you can still see the discussion  I mentioned above, you are lucky as it was hidden by the moderator(s) there in order to avoid people from seeing it on their web site., Free speech ? No, it is an enemy of psuedo science. Free speech is not allowed, like taboo , in the world of pseudo science. For the people who cannot see the above discussion (if it is removed totally from the site), let me recap some interesting dialogs in the discussion here: ( pink comments are from the moderator, blue are mine) The following dialogs are referring to my previous  blog about the debunking of the "Monty's video" Moderator: I asked you why you were  misrepresenting the information  obtained from other web

 " The 'Monty's video' shows Hi-Res is useless. The expert said you won't get stair step audio signal ..." I bet the above video , also known as "the Monty's video", is quite famous amongst the supporters who turly believe that " Hi-Res is useless". Whenever these supporters were questioned why "Hi-Res is useless", some of them would just show you that "scientific proof". Some supporter even made another YouTube video to support the very same "scientific" claim based on the same "Monty's video" (as they considered all the things the Monty's video said is factual). The supporter named his video as " Debunking the Digital Audio Myth: The Truth About the 'Stair-Step' Effect " A lot of these supporters may asked, "With so many experts on YouTube demonstrating so clearly with the help of a bunch of   lab equipments and doing various experiments in front of our eyes ,

  A troll or not a troll, that's the question What is a troll ? According to wikipedia, In  slang , a  troll  is a person who posts deliberately offensive or provocative messages online [1]  (such as in  social media , a  newsgroup , a  forum , a  chat room , an  online video game ) or who performs similar behaviors in real life. Is  a person who has critical thinking a troll ? That person  would be considered as a troll if you found critical thinking is offensive and provocative like a taboo .  Any person who want to share his view point with critical thinking would definitely be considered as a troll in this situation. Why a site can attract so many critical thinking people whom they considered as "trolls" ? There must be something wrong (pun indeed) p.s.: By the way, that person is banned eventually and more people are pointing fingers to him after that... just in case you want to know.